@euu
If there are people willing to discuss I see no reasons to close the discussion as long as it treats every person and every opinion with respect. I value freedom of expression and different opinions on any subjects. I do not think I can contribute to the discussion more than I already shared. I also believe that BDFL is currently the best option for Freeplane as a project. However there is always a chance to learn.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I have participated in "leaderless" projects. Not one of them turned out any good. Things "designed by committee" (one of the more common choices when a strong leader isn't present, almost always fails. Can anyone think of any famous project that was successful without strong leadership?
In my mind, Dimitry has always been the leader. I don't see that changing unless he wants out of the role. And given the absolutely superb product that is Freeplane, I am glad of this.
I'm not a coder and don't have much ability to contribute. So I am also appreciative of the development members. You all rock!
One man's opinion. :)
~ Bal
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I'm surprised at Bal Simon's post. I don't think anyone wants a leaderless project. Obviously having a strong leader is essential.
In case it is not clear, I also think BDFL is one of the right models for non-profit, free, open source projects.
There are different ways to do BDFL, even with the same leaders, and I am not suggesting changing leadership. I would just like FP to have more impact than it currently does, and I think that this requires some changes in the methods of decision-making, although I am not sure right now exactly what those should be. I proposed the idea of making some shared goals explicit and creating guidelines to use to make decisions, but I am open to other ideas too.
Last edit: quickfold 2021-11-13
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I guess I was unconsciously reacting to the word "dictator" which usually connotes something negative in my mind. Even "benevolent dictator" seems like a "left-handed compliment" to me.
And I'm not asking that the word be dropped. I don't like any form of political correctness. It was just a gut reaction. Please don't take it as anything more than that. :)
~ Bal
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Thanks for clarifying. I didn't invent the term "BDFL", I came across it when doing some research on how open-source projects can make good decisions about goals and direction. That's why I linked the wikipedia page and tried to clarify that I didn't mean it as a slur or an insult. The term exists in the world and it describes FP (and emacs and Blender) leadership.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I don't see any clear solution to the decision-making question, so let me try to give another perspective to the problem. Quickfold, you are worried about "wasting" time on creating a proposal for a UI change that may very well be rejected for unpredictable reasons. But, what if you don't see it as wasted time, even if it's rejected? To help with that, two things would be useful:
-Having a clear idea of what are the priority areas that need improvement. For example, here, if I had, from the start, a clear idea that the filters are not a priority (and I should have noticed it), I wouldn't have spent time on that (but, even in that situation, I don't feel that it was wasted time).
-A good knowledgebase of forum discussions, that would make any effort to be useful on future tries to solve the same problem. It would be good to keep a list of threads that talk about each of the high priority problems.
It seems to be already clear that UI improvements are high priority. So, maybe you can be safe that the time that you spend on that Ribbon prototype will be useful to improve the knowledge mass around the UI problem, even if it ends up not being used? I mean, we will all certainly learn and have interesting ideas when you present it.
So, the idea here is to let Dimitry do his traditional method of decision-making, and then we focus on proposing ideas until the point that a very convincing idea arises.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
@quickfold
I absolutely agree with euu. Not following your passion just because of the risk of a failure is a failure by itself. If nobody contributes to the UI development in general in to Ribbons in particular, the probability of improvement and new learning is exactly 0%. If people decide to contribute, it is highly likely that their contribution become integrated and it is for sure that everyone who follows this development can learn and grow. But there is also no pressure to contribute, feel free, do whatever feels good for you.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Fortunately, I think that designing a ribbon may not be necessary to get feedback on the ribbon UI. Dimitry and others, can you look at these < 2 min videos showing the program MindManager and let us know what you think of the Ribbon UI they use? Let us try not to be distracted by all of the many differences between this program and Freeplane, and focus what people think of the Ribbon UI (which includes menus) vs. the current FP toolbars with all of the buttons shown at the same time. Note that the ribbon is divided into sections with related functions.
To me, it seems that MindMananger is the only commercial mapping program that approaches FP in terms of handling very complex map functions, so looking at their videos may be useful for considering other UI issues: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbXpbXat7_rezdCzAP3XZLw
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Before commenting on the concrete prototype, I would like to point out to this page that presents the Radiance Ribbon, that Dimitry is planning to use. It looks good and powerful, but there is something that I don't understand: if this library is implemented, will FP have access to all of those things, like the ribbon taskbar, rich tooltips, and complex popup content (like the in-ribbon galleries)?
In that page there is the ribbon terminology, that we can use here, in order to make the communication more clear.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Dimitry and others, can you look at these < 2 min videos showing the program MindManager and let us know what you think of the Ribbon UI they use
They all look nice.
I think the first video uses menu while ribbon is still visible, this option is not available in Radiance Ribbon.
The second video looks nice, painting all theme previews was a lot of work and keeping them up-to-date is even more work, and for user themes AKA templates it seems not manageable.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
The second video looks nice, painting all theme previews was a lot of work and keeping them up-to-date is even more work, and for user themes AKA templates it seems not manageable.
Sorry, I don't understand what this quote means.
Do you mean: painting the template previews in FP (which currently appears when the user creates a new map), was a lot of work and keeping them up-to-date is even more work. Also, there is a problem when the user creates his own templates, because, then, there is no preview, as it is a static image that needs to be created manually. So, the gallery in the Radiance Ribbon will also have those problems, as the previews are not created automatically
So, what is still not clear to me is if, when using the Radiance Ribbon, those contents inside the galleries and comboboxes are created dynamically and automatically or if they are just static images that were created manually.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
So what is the next step then?
How will you feel if you create a ribbon that some users strongly reject but others like?
If we make a ribbon with a certain layout and people disagree about the best layout, how to proceed?
I think the first video uses menu while ribbon is still visible, this option is not available in Radiance Ribbon.
Is this a dealbreaker or even a significant problem? The general solution would be to have all current menu items show in the ribbon or be accessible from pop-up windows when ribbon icons are clicked.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
How will you feel if you create a ribbon that some users strongly reject but others like?
I am totally relaxed about some user's disagreement with ribbons because if I agree with them they should be able to continue using the beloved menus. I am going to make the switch between ribbons and old menus and toolbars really easy.
So what is the next step then?
I think in the next step we could work on one ribbon of your choice and get it running.
You can specify its content in some informal way first, then we can try to formalize it using xml similar to Freeplane menu definition XML and then I could work on experimental version showing this ribbon. If we are satisfied with the demo we coulc continue ribbon by ribbon until at least the core functionality relevant for beginners is covered. Then we can release.
I think using menu while ribbon is still visible is not available in Radiance Ribbon.
Is this a dealbreaker or even a significant problem? The general solution would be to have all current menu items show in the ribbon or be accessible from pop-up windows when ribbon icons are clicked.
I think we should not mix up ribbon based UI and menu UI, I think it would not make things easier.
If you want to use ribbons just as replacement for toolbars I could probably also try to work it our, but then only some actions would be discoverable and as you say average users could become confused.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
@euu
If there are people willing to discuss I see no reasons to close the discussion as long as it treats every person and every opinion with respect. I value freedom of expression and different opinions on any subjects. I do not think I can contribute to the discussion more than I already shared. I also believe that BDFL is currently the best option for Freeplane as a project. However there is always a chance to learn.
I have participated in "leaderless" projects. Not one of them turned out any good. Things "designed by committee" (one of the more common choices when a strong leader isn't present, almost always fails. Can anyone think of any famous project that was successful without strong leadership?
In my mind, Dimitry has always been the leader. I don't see that changing unless he wants out of the role. And given the absolutely superb product that is Freeplane, I am glad of this.
I'm not a coder and don't have much ability to contribute. So I am also appreciative of the development members. You all rock!
One man's opinion. :)
~ Bal
I'm surprised at Bal Simon's post. I don't think anyone wants a leaderless project. Obviously having a strong leader is essential.
In case it is not clear, I also think BDFL is one of the right models for non-profit, free, open source projects.
There are different ways to do BDFL, even with the same leaders, and I am not suggesting changing leadership. I would just like FP to have more impact than it currently does, and I think that this requires some changes in the methods of decision-making, although I am not sure right now exactly what those should be. I proposed the idea of making some shared goals explicit and creating guidelines to use to make decisions, but I am open to other ideas too.
Last edit: quickfold 2021-11-13
I guess I was unconsciously reacting to the word "dictator" which usually connotes something negative in my mind. Even "benevolent dictator" seems like a "left-handed compliment" to me.
And I'm not asking that the word be dropped. I don't like any form of political correctness. It was just a gut reaction. Please don't take it as anything more than that. :)
~ Bal
Thanks for clarifying. I didn't invent the term "BDFL", I came across it when doing some research on how open-source projects can make good decisions about goals and direction. That's why I linked the wikipedia page and tried to clarify that I didn't mean it as a slur or an insult. The term exists in the world and it describes FP (and emacs and Blender) leadership.
Yes - I am aware. I saw it a Calvin and Hobbes comic strip a long time ago. I'm glad we're pretty much on the same page now.
Last edit: Bal Simon 2021-11-12
I don't see any clear solution to the decision-making question, so let me try to give another perspective to the problem. Quickfold, you are worried about "wasting" time on creating a proposal for a UI change that may very well be rejected for unpredictable reasons. But, what if you don't see it as wasted time, even if it's rejected? To help with that, two things would be useful:
-Having a clear idea of what are the priority areas that need improvement. For example, here, if I had, from the start, a clear idea that the filters are not a priority (and I should have noticed it), I wouldn't have spent time on that (but, even in that situation, I don't feel that it was wasted time).
-A good knowledgebase of forum discussions, that would make any effort to be useful on future tries to solve the same problem. It would be good to keep a list of threads that talk about each of the high priority problems.
It seems to be already clear that UI improvements are high priority. So, maybe you can be safe that the time that you spend on that Ribbon prototype will be useful to improve the knowledge mass around the UI problem, even if it ends up not being used? I mean, we will all certainly learn and have interesting ideas when you present it.
So, the idea here is to let Dimitry do his traditional method of decision-making, and then we focus on proposing ideas until the point that a very convincing idea arises.
@quickfold
I absolutely agree with euu. Not following your passion just because of the risk of a failure is a failure by itself. If nobody contributes to the UI development in general in to Ribbons in particular, the probability of improvement and new learning is exactly 0%. If people decide to contribute, it is highly likely that their contribution become integrated and it is for sure that everyone who follows this development can learn and grow. But there is also no pressure to contribute, feel free, do whatever feels good for you.
@dpolivaev, @euu
Fortunately, I think that designing a ribbon may not be necessary to get feedback on the ribbon UI. Dimitry and others, can you look at these < 2 min videos showing the program MindManager and let us know what you think of the Ribbon UI they use? Let us try not to be distracted by all of the many differences between this program and Freeplane, and focus what people think of the Ribbon UI (which includes menus) vs. the current FP toolbars with all of the buttons shown at the same time. Note that the ribbon is divided into sections with related functions.
Formatting a level style (they call level 1 a "topic", level 2 a "subtopic", etc.) with a format panel
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKZl9N13D-A
Choosing and trying different templates (which they call "themes") using a Ribbon and sub-ribbon panel.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BeKPn42s1XE
To me, it seems that MindMananger is the only commercial mapping program that approaches FP in terms of handling very complex map functions, so looking at their videos may be useful for considering other UI issues:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbXpbXat7_rezdCzAP3XZLw
Before commenting on the concrete prototype, I would like to point out to this page that presents the Radiance Ribbon, that Dimitry is planning to use. It looks good and powerful, but there is something that I don't understand: if this library is implemented, will FP have access to all of those things, like the ribbon taskbar, rich tooltips, and complex popup content (like the in-ribbon galleries)?
In that page there is the ribbon terminology, that we can use here, in order to make the communication more clear.
They all look nice.
I think the first video uses menu while ribbon is still visible, this option is not available in Radiance Ribbon.
The second video looks nice, painting all theme previews was a lot of work and keeping them up-to-date is even more work, and for user themes AKA templates it seems not manageable.
Sorry, I don't understand what this quote means.
Do you mean:
painting the template previews in FP (which currently appears when the user creates a new map), was a lot of work and keeping them up-to-date is even more work. Also, there is a problem when the user creates his own templates, because, then, there is no preview, as it is a static image that needs to be created manually. So, the gallery in the Radiance Ribbon will also have those problems, as the previews are not created automaticallySo, what is still not clear to me is if, when using the Radiance Ribbon, those contents inside the galleries and comboboxes are created dynamically and automatically or if they are just static images that were created manually.
Dimitry wrote:
So what is the next step then?
How will you feel if you create a ribbon that some users strongly reject but others like?
If we make a ribbon with a certain layout and people disagree about the best layout, how to proceed?
Is this a dealbreaker or even a significant problem? The general solution would be to have all current menu items show in the ribbon or be accessible from pop-up windows when ribbon icons are clicked.
@quickfold
I am totally relaxed about some user's disagreement with ribbons because if I agree with them they should be able to continue using the beloved menus. I am going to make the switch between ribbons and old menus and toolbars really easy.
I think in the next step we could work on one ribbon of your choice and get it running.
You can specify its content in some informal way first, then we can try to formalize it using xml similar to Freeplane menu definition XML and then I could work on experimental version showing this ribbon. If we are satisfied with the demo we coulc continue ribbon by ribbon until at least the core functionality relevant for beginners is covered. Then we can release.
I think we should not mix up ribbon based UI and menu UI, I think it would not make things easier.
If you want to use ribbons just as replacement for toolbars I could probably also try to work it our, but then only some actions would be discoverable and as you say average users could become confused.